Google Maps API keys now open all iOS developers

The move could mean more developers using Google's data instead of Apple's.

The Google Maps SDK for iOS is now open to all iOS developers—not just those who get approval for API keys through Google. The move almost guarantees more third-party iOS apps will use Google's data instead of Apple's, though it's still too early to tell whether the change will significantly affect Apple or the use of its own mapping APIs.

Google announced it had updated its SDK for iOS in a blog post late Thursday, noting updated support for ground overlays, gesture control, and geodesic polylines. The company didn't specifically discuss the increased openness of its mapping API, but observers were quick to notice—Google now makes its API keys available to all iOS developers through its API Console. This means developers who don't want to use Apple's mapping API can use Google's without having to apply and wait for approval.

Google first announced its Maps SDK for iOS last December, not long after Apple kicked the mapping giant out of its iOS 6 Maps app. Google released its own Maps app for iOS, too, and made its (arguably superior) data store available to third-party developers through the SDK. Devs still can't use turn-by-turn navigation in their apps while using Google's SDK, but the increased access to Google's data is sure to improve what is available to users on the App Store.

On Thursday, Google also released a sample app with its SDK to help developers learn more about Google Maps:

So to recap, to put the squeeze on Apple, Google starts monetizing and putting restrictions on third-party use of their API, so Apple creates their own, so to compete, Google loosens up restrictions on their own API.

So to recap, to put the squeeze on Apple, Google starts monetizing and putting restrictions on third-party use of their API, so Apple creates their own, so to compete, Google loosens up restrictions on their own API.

With all of the angst regarding Apple Maps, it would be interesting to see a hybrid solution that unifies Apple and Google map data in one app, allowing users to check search results using the other service before driving off that cliff...

Although the technology is beyond a Smartphone app, it would be interesting if the Apple QA team could hook up the Google API to their test rig and use it to present maps at similar resolutions and then use image diff & OCR software to identify and flag egregious map errors quickly for manual review.

Although there are obviously the twin problems of Apple and Google map data not matching reality and Google being wrong while Apple is right, in my opinion this method would certainly be quicker than relying on customer error reports.

With all of the angst regarding Apple Maps, it would be interesting to see a hybrid solution that unifies Apple and Google map data in one app, allowing users to check search results using the other service before driving off that cliff...

Although the technology is beyond a Smartphone app, it would be interesting if the Apple QA team could hook up the Google API to their test rig and use it to present maps at similar resolutions and then use image diff & OCR software to identify and flag egregious map errors quickly for manual review.

Although there are obviously the twin problems of Apple and Google map data not matching reality and Google being wrong while Apple is right, in my opinion this method would certainly be quicker than relying on customer error reports.

A hybrid app would be incredible if it could seamlessly integrate both without duplicates &c.

Using Google's DB to fix Apple's would make them look like freeloaders, and sounds like it would be legally shady at best.

So to recap, to put the squeeze on Apple, Google starts monetizing and putting restrictions on third-party use of their API, so Apple creates their own, so to compete, Google loosens up restrictions on their own API.

"(a) Google reserves the right to include advertising in the places results provided to you in the Maps API(s). By using the Maps API(s) to obtain places results, you agree to display such advertising in the form provided to you by Google."

This alone makes Apple's map API much more appealing to me as a developer.

Sure, an app with 100,000 daily uses will only cost $35 per day ($0.50 level) but that becomes $12,775 per year.

That needs to be paid for somehow.

What is the cost of Apple's free?

Google Maps APIs for mobile devices are and have always been free:

Quote:

The Google Earth API, and native Maps APIs for mobile platforms such as Android and iOS are not affected. Use of the embed feature of Google Maps, and other Google products that offer an embed feature that includes a map, are not affected by these limits.

Sure, an app with 100,000 daily uses will only cost $35 per day ($0.50 level) but that becomes $12,775 per year.

That needs to be paid for somehow.

What is the cost of Apple's free?

Google Maps APIs for mobile devices are and have always been free:

Quote:

The Google Earth API, and native Maps APIs for mobile platforms such as Android and iOS are not affected. Use of the embed feature of Google Maps, and other Google products that offer an embed feature that includes a map, are not affected by these limits.

Can we have the gov't go after Google now for providing things to iOS that it refuses to supply for WP8?

Hopefully stuff like this makes for good lawsuit fodder later.

Yes. The answer is ask the government to help. When a business doesn't do *exactly* what the consumer wants....whine and sue. What fucking bullshit.

How about this - how about Microsoft find a way to make their mobile OS something more than Late-to-the-party also-ran. How about they actually compete instead of getting their butts handed to them?

Make a game out of it for God's sake.

Apple and Google are laughing their asses off at Microsoft and Microsoft deserves it. Or maybe MS just dries up and blows away in mobile. Doesn't matte, because nobody in mainstream America (or the World) cares enough about WP8. The world won't notice if (when) it disappears. That's Microsoft's problem. They've become irrelevant in this space. Google doesn't support WP8 because it's not viable enough to bother.

No, you need a Mac for that (OK, in that sense Internet Explorer shouldn't be considered free...).Also, it is useless apart from testing purposes, because you still have to pay to see your app in the App Store.

No, you need a Mac for that (OK, in that sense Internet Explorer shouldn't be considered free...).Also, it is useless apart from testing purposes, because you still have to pay to see your app in the App Store.

you can by a hackintosh for $200 on craigslist. You need *a computer* to code for anything.

No, you need a Mac for that (OK, in that sense Internet Explorer shouldn't be considered free...).Also, it is useless apart from testing purposes, because you still have to pay to see your app in the App Store.

You need a computer for any development. Complaining about that is as sensible as complaining that you need electricity infrastructure, a building, etc to provide a development environment.

No, you need a Mac for that (OK, in that sense Internet Explorer shouldn't be considered free...).Also, it is useless apart from testing purposes, because you still have to pay to see your app in the App Store.

I will grant you that while I can develop and Android app on OS X that Apple does not offer X-Code for free on platforms other than OS X. One difference might be that Google is not (yet) and OS vendor in the same vein as Apple or Microsoft, so they have a vested interest in being multi-platform while MS and Apple do not.

On the subject of publishing your app, once you have designed, developed and tested an iOS app, is $99 really a high barrier for entry to the iOS ecosystem with all its benefits (unlimited back-end sales support, iAds for gathering revenue from "Free" apps, etc.)? I can't even host the most basic e-commerce website, let alone worry about security, redundancy or bandwidth fees for $99/year...

Sure, an app with 100,000 daily uses will only cost $35 per day ($0.50 level) but that becomes $12,775 per year.

That needs to be paid for somehow.

What is the cost of Apple's free?

Google Maps APIs for mobile devices are and have always been free:

Quote:

The Google Earth API, and native Maps APIs for mobile platforms such as Android and iOS are not affected. Use of the embed feature of Google Maps, and other Google products that offer an embed feature that includes a map, are not affected by these limits.

It is only if you want to develop non-free business applications to leverage Google Maps do you have to pay anything - but the plus is you can use the same APIs for web and mobile applications...

The purpose is to make money and profit as a developer, using Googles API's and having their Ads or tracking info sent to Google, is unacceptable.

By using Google's API you're providing more value to your customers. That makes you more money. Google maps are objectively better than Apple maps.Tracking info is sent to Apple or Google, the only thing you chose is who to send that data to.Sponsored entries are only mandatory when searching POI.

No, you need a Mac for that (OK, in that sense Internet Explorer shouldn't be considered free...).Also, it is useless apart from testing purposes, because you still have to pay to see your app in the App Store.

I will grant you that while I can develop and Android app on OS X that Apple does not offer X-Code for free on platforms other than OS X. One difference might be that Google is not (yet) and OS vendor in the same vein as Apple or Microsoft, so they have a vested interest in being multi-platform while MS and Apple do not.

On the subject of publishing your app, once you have designed, developed and tested an iOS app, is $99 really a high barrier for entry to the iOS ecosystem with all its benefits (unlimited back-end sales support, iAds for gathering revenue from "Free" apps, etc.)? I can't even host the most basic e-commerce website, let alone worry about security, redundancy or bandwidth fees for $99/year...

It keeps some of the dreck out. Seriously, any one negatively impacted by the $99/yr, but has a "killer app"? Call me, we can work out a deal.

One thing I don't like about it is that I as a user do not know/control the information it's sending to who.With the maps that come with the OS, the user can control/know/understand at least who is collecting data on them. Now, it's up to the developer, and if the user isn't comfortable with having their mapping information through Google, the user wouldn't know that the maps are coming from Google.

What I'd ideally like is a generic iOS API that the user can choose where it gets the data from (Apple, Google, anyone else that come to the table). If you don't have that, the privacy concerns become quagmire.

edit: I mean a single iOS-map-API that the user can choose in System where the data comes from, and all developers use the same API, but the data comes from where the user chooses...